Official 2026 Free Agency/Offseason/Non-Draft Thread

[pbmax]

Of course, the cap will go up. And there are always ways to deal with those cap issues - restructuring, etc.

They ought to be able to do better than Jenkins as he played this year. Jenkins of last season, they would and should find a way. It kinda depends on which they think is the real him.

They ought to be able to find somebody as good as Gary for the same money, but I have a hunch they will resign him on a cap-friendly deal.

The Packers have a LOT of dead cap space (Alexander, Preston Smith, Devondre Campbell, Clark) and Love and Parsons have void years that need to be dealt with eventually. Unless you want to watch the Saints experience repeated, they need to be on a budget for a couple of years.

And one of the ways people massage the cap is to let contracts go before they get ridiculous. Jenkins isn't returning on his current deal. His number is too big even if he was playing at an All Pro level.

Gary, if his pass rush picks up, might make an interesting trade piece. He's way too inconsistent for his salary. But I don't know how big a hit that will be.

[texaspackerbacker]

Some people always whine and worry about the cap - fans, sometime media pukes, but somehow not the people really in the know - the people that run the team seem to have it figured out and all the panicky crap never happens, not in Green Bay anyway. The few teams that have ever ended up in "cap hell" were stupid and deserved it. Much ado about very little.

Everybody that needs to be retained or signed will. Watch and see.

Gary "interesting trade piece"? I doubt it. He will be back unless they decide he shouldn't be, and they find somebody better. (I wouldn't rule out that Van Ness, Sorrell, and Enagbare make him unnecessary, though.)

[ThunderDan]

They are predicting a $16,000,000+ jump in the cap for next year, up over 5.5%.

Our $10,000,000 in room is including that $16,000,000 jump.

[ThunderDan]

Packers at $286,000,000 in total cap liabilities. Due to top 51 spending and deadcap we are at $269,000,000 with $10,000,000 I’m space.

For next year packers at $295,000,000 in total cap liabilities. Right at the limit, but if we keep this years $10,000,000 in space it goes to next year. That is with shedding $40,000,000 in dead cap hits and paying only 41 players.

[Joemailman]

They are predicting a $16,000,000+ jump in the cap for next year, up over 5.5%.

Our $10,000,000 in room is including that $16,000,000 jump.

The whole division will have issues to deal with. As things stand right now, at start of 2026 league year, the Packers will have $10 million cap space, the Lions $6 million, the Bears $1 million and the Vikings will be $37 million over. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

[ThunderDan]

The whole division will have issues to deal with. As things stand right now, at start of 2026 league year, the Packers will have $10 million cap space, the Lions $6 million, the Bears $1 million and the Vikings will be $37 million over. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

I saw that for the Vikings and went Holy Shit and they have to sign Addison.

[ThunderDan]

Addison is signed thru 2026. Don’t have to resign until 2027 but after what happened with JJ, I think they will want to get something done a little earlier.

[Fritz]

The whole division will have issues to deal with. As things stand right now, at start of 2026 league year, the Packers will have $10 million cap space, the Lions $6 million, the Bears $1 million and the Vikings will be $37 million over. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

Are you seriously telling me that the Packers are in a better cap position than the rest of the NFC North? For real?

[pbmax]

Some people always whine and worry about the cap - fans, sometime media pukes, but somehow not the people really in the know - the people that run the team seem to have it figured out and all the panicky crap never happens, not in Green Bay anyway. The few teams that have ever ended up in "cap hell" were stupid and deserved it. Much ado about very little.

Rodgers put the Packers in cap hell* with his last holdout/squeeze. They could easily afford him at his then salary plus Love. But he played it well (and Love wasn't ready) and they paid a fortune to him again for one year with less than stellar Rodgers.

If Rodgers plays only one season and then retires, gets released or is traded in 2023, the Packers would have to absorb at least $68 million in dead money (and up to $99.8 million if it occurred before June 1) --

Managing the cap simply involves making choices. And the Packers can make mistakes there. Bach, Alexander, maybe Jenkins, maybe Clark. There will be good players they need to let go with the Love, Gary and Parson deals. And they will need to replace them with draft picks. And they are missing some number 1s in the immediate future.

The youngest roster will be getting a little younger and adding multiple cheap parts.


* not Saints cap hell, no one else is close there, but it was expensive

[NewsBruin]

The few teams that have ever ended up in "cap hell" were stupid and deserved it. Much ado about very little.

Everybody that needs to be retained or signed will. Watch and see.

You're consistent about this. All teams can avoid salary-cap issues, except the stupid ones. All players can be re-signed with a little elbow grease and a prove-yourself hometown discount. If they weren't re-signed, that just shows we didn't need them anyway.

I believe you also wanted to trade for Rodgers' 10 remaining games, giving up Jordan Love's next three seasons and cap hit, on a team with no other active-roster QBs coming back in 2026, because Tom Brady was able to play into his forties.

[Patler]

Doubs, Watson, Kraft, Reed, Wicks. With Golden and Williams in hand for the next three years they only need to sign at most three of the others the next two years to significant contracts.

Re-signing Kraft is a given, unless his ACL surgery turns out like Bakhtiari's did.

Letting Wicks walk is a given, unless he can be resigned to a very inexpensive contract. He really has not done anything so far, so a cheap contract is a distinct possibility. He is just a filler-piece until he shows more on the field consistently.

That leaves Doubs, Watson and Reed. Why would you want to invest cap space on more than two of them?

Watson makes the offense different. Re-sign him if he holds up this year and next.

Reed makes a bigger "splash" than Doubs. It will be interesting to see if the offense finds its way when he returns in the next few weeks.

I would take Reed over Doubs and take the compensatory draft pick for losing Doubs. Develop the two rookies, bring in another draft pick and they should still have a solid receiver group.

[Patler]

The Packers have avoided any prolonged effects from "cap hell" because they are willing to bite the bullet and get rid of expensive players, including not overpaying too many second or third contracts; they consistently structure second and third contracts to include acceptable, even if expensive, outs in later years; and they consistently restock with younger players who earn their keep.

If they are just a tick better than average at all those things, and two ticks better than some of the other teams, they can consistently avoid the effects of cap hell.

[bobblehead]

Packers are $10,000,000 under the cap for 2026 and only have 41 players under contract.

Jenkins is gone. So that gets us to $30,000,000 in cap space needing to sign our free agents and draft class.

The Packers will only be able to sign mid-tier deals. No one else is getting a top of the position contract.

Also in 2026, right now we are finally down to only $17,000,000 in dead cap fron the Clark trade. We have $50,000,000 in dead cap space this year and I think will the ARod issues we have been close to $100,000,000 in dead cap before.

You can sign a guy like Enagbare to a 4 year deal that has a minimal year 1 cap hit. Others too. I'm not predicting anything here, just pointing out that sometimes higher price guys actually cost less in the first year or 2.

[bobblehead]

The Packers have avoided any prolonged effects from "cap hell" because they are willing to bite the bullet and get rid of expensive players, including not overpaying too many second or third contracts; they consistently structure second and third contracts to include acceptable, even if expensive, outs in later years; and they consistently restock with younger players who earn their keep.

If they are just a tick better than average at all those things, and two ticks better than some of the other teams, they can consistently avoid the effects of cap hell.

Recently Gutes has gotten much better at adding day 3 talent that is helpful. His early drafts not so much. One can hope and pray that he recognizes that all the football players he drafted on day 3 are way better than the previous athletes and just maybe he will apply that to day 2 (There will be no day 1 for a couple years).

[Anti-Polar Bear]

The Packers have avoided any prolonged effects from "cap hell" because they are willing to bite the bullet and get rid of expensive players, including not overpaying too many second or third contracts; they consistently structure second and third contracts to include acceptable, even if expensive, outs in later years; and they consistently restock with younger players who earn their keep.

If they are just a tick better than average at all those things, and two ticks better than some of the other teams, they can consistently avoid the effects of cap hell.

Absence of an abnormal pandemic, there ain’t such fuck as a “cap hell” anymore in the NFL.

The NFL is essentially a colossal monopoly with antitrust exemptions and government subsidies. As such, it is able to overcharge customers and force the Networks to pony up…and steal from taxpayers in the name and game of stadium upgrades. In other words, NFL revenues continue to skyrocket, and it will continue skyrocketing - absence of an abnormal pandemic. So long as revenues continue to skyrocket, so too will the salary cap - and thus, rendering “cap hell” irrelevant.

Jerry Jones traded “Peerless” Parsons to the Packers not because signing Parsons to a sumptuous contract would put the Cowfuckers in the dreaded cap hell. Jones coulda paid Parsons more than the Packers did if he desired.

Jones traded Parsons because Parsons’ contract would fuck with his bottom line. Pigs seek to get fat after all.